Northrop trademarked the name "flying wing" in 1929. The 1929 "Flying Wing" wasn't tailless in any sense of the term but it did have a thick wing that contained the engine and crew. Apparently this plane's wing was designed to fly without auxiliary surfaces but Northrop attached them just in case it didn't work. To this day most airplanes called flying wings have some vertical surfaces, often quite large vertical surfaces, but never a horizontal stabilizer.

On the other hand most people who use the word "Nurflügel" tend to minimize verticals if not avoid them altogether. It's a much more interesting technical challenge

Northrop trademarked the name "flying wing" in 1929. The 1929 "Flying Wing" wasn't tailless in any sense of the term but it did have a thick wing that contained the engine and crew. Apparently this plane's wing was designed to fly without auxiliary surfaces but Northrop attached them just in case it didn't work. To this day most airplanes called flying wings have some vertical surfaces, often quite large vertical surfaces, but never a horizontal stabilizer.

On the other hand most people who use the word "Nurflügel" tend to minimize verticals if not avoid them altogether. It's a much more interesting technical challenge

I don't know if it's really technically correct because we do have wings in the flying wing forum without vertical surfaces (Assasin) and we do have wings in the Nurflugel forum with fairly large vertical surfaces.

The primary difference I see is the high aspect ratio wings which are typical here and low aspect ratio wings which are typical in the flying wing forum.

I guess one reason a separate flying wing forum was needed was because the builds of typical Nurflugels (the majority of which are balsa) could not be posted in the flying wing forum because it's under the foamies, electric category. Previously balsa wing builds were posted all over the place on RCG and you had to look hard to find them.

I'm not sure I speak for the majority or if it's only my feeling but when I voted for the creation of this forum it was because the flying wing forum is swamped with all the Zagis, Assasins, Widowmakers etc - short, stout, fast wings and any posting about high performance gliders or pure Hortens or other historical scale wings like the Dunne quickly sinks to page 3 within 24 hours. I wanted a forum about flying wings that wasn't all pusher jets.

That sums things up.When I first came on rcgroups my main interest was stuff on the Luft46 site,particularly the Hortens and other flying wings.I too got tired looking everywhere for Horten and other high ar stuff.

Nurflügel is just the german term for flying wing, so the distinction between both forums is not obvious by names.

In rcg the term flying wing has been used predominantly for the stubby chevron type epp models with electric drive.
In the german forum www.rc-network.de there has been a quite busy nurflügel section for years now, where the above mentioned electric epp models are appropriate, but actually get rarely discussed.
The focus is more on higher aspect ratio, performance, elaborate design, aero science related to all kinds of tailless aircraft.
A number of people on rgc sought a place for just that sort of stuff, that would get buried in heaps of epp in the (electric) flying wing section on this board.
And that's why this section got created.

I'm not a big fan of the forum description, though:
"For Horten style aircraft, be it powered or glider. Typically Flying Wings without rudders."
We had that discussion at length, already.
I guess the rcg administration does not want monthly changes to forum descriptions for obvious reasons.
So it is ok, as it is, but may be a bit misleading, in ecxessively narrowing down the scope.

For me Nurflügel includes planks, swept with or without winglets, c-wings, bwb, deltas, etc.
Regardless of construction techniques and whether powered or not.

I'm not a big fan of the forum description, though:
"For Horten style aircraft, be it powered or glider. Typically Flying Wings without rudders."
biber

I agree 100%. Although those are my words, I was misinformed at the time.

A new description of "Flying Wings of all kinds" would be my proposal. I would like to see it changed. Changed to anything than what it is now.

I'm sure a description change is possible. The Admin. of RCG has been very supportive of any request that I have made. I'm sure that they would be delighted to spend 2 minutes and change the description. At the very worst case, in order to be fair, it may require another proposal and 50 votes to get changed.

I'll support anyone who steps forward to fix this. It's free. All you'll have to do is send an email to them from the contacts page.

As biber mentioned, there is a fairly lengthy discussion of this topic elsewhere, but I would not think that we'll be overrun with Zagi's if it were to be labeled with the very general all inclusive "Flying Wings of all kinds". My complaint about the other flying wing forums that exist on RCG is that they are too specialized. For example, the Flying Wing forum is a sub-forum in the Airplace-Electric forum.......so that cuts me out.....I fly gliders.

So far we have encouraged all types of flying wings and still no Zagi's.....they already have a forum and they seem quite happy there.

A new description of "Flying Wings of all kinds" would be my proposal. I would like to see it changed. Changed to anything than what it is now.

Since the other forum's description is "Discussion of RC flying wings and other tail-less RC aircraft" how would that description differentiate this forum from the other flying wing forum? This ambivalence concerning purpose is why I didn't vote for it in the first place. It has drawn off most of the interesting projects but that's not what you said was your intent. The older forum is now practically devoid of real airplanes that fly on the wing. There are still a few designers of dynamic lifting airplanes using the other forum but for the most part it's big motors with fins. This is where the tailless fans with an interest in actually flying hang out

Since the other forum's description is "Discussion of RC flying wings and other tail-less RC aircraft" how would that description differentiate this forum from the other flying wing forum?

We double posted Norm. But just to be clear, the Nurflúgel forum includes all flying wings and all other flying wing forums that currently exist on RCG are sub-sets of Nurflügel forum. Some may electric, other combat wings.

The value of such a Nurflügel forum for posters and lurkers a like is the freedom and diversity it allows.....(can you tell that I live in California? )

From my rather limited point of view it seems to be working pretty well with Kent's somewhat arcane title. If anything, perhaps a minor adjustment to the sub-title would be in order, but anyone who is interested enough to view the threads should get a good feel for the range and diversity of the posts. IMHO of course

From my rather limited point of view it seems to be working pretty well with Kent's somewhat arcane title. If anything, perhaps a minor adjustment to the sub-title would be in order, but anyone who is interested enough to view the threads should get a good feel for the range and diversity of the posts. IMHO of course

I'm with Herks on this one.I can see Norms point,but the problem I had when I first joined was that,as Slebetman says,any wings that I found interesting were quickly absorbed by a mass of zagi types.Or were scattered through other forums.This still happens of course and always will.As time goes on the forum will get more understood for what it is.
I still visit the"other place"daily,and try to point what I think would be relevant in this direction.